Michael S. Lorrey wrote:
> > I have in mind the standard relativistic view of space-time as a singular
> > always existing whole. ...
>What about the concept that going back to change the past either
>future timeline you came from, or shifts you over to a new timeline (depending
>on whether you buy multiverses or just a single timeline at any given time).
I don't know of any physics articles on time machines based on this concept.
But if this could make sense it would only strengthen the basic claim I was
making, which is that helping your past selves is not logically impossible.
>Now, as to market weighting, I was under the impression that a market
>is really only a failure of participants to accurately predict correct prices,
>that the 'correction' that occurs in a 'failure' is really just the market
>forces re-asserting themselves over the improperly distorted choices of
>participants who are empowered disproportionately by outside factors like
>governments, regulation, etc., so in a sense, it is regressing to its true
>on the timeline.
You are of course free to invent your own meaning for the term, but the
economist meaning is just a feature of a scenario that causes a market to
worse outcomes, wrt a standard welfare measure, seem otherwise possible.
Robin Hanson firstname.lastname@example.org http://hanson.gmu.edu
Asst. Prof. Economics, George Mason University
MSN 1D3, Carow Hall, Fairfax VA 22030-4444
703-993-2326 FAX: 703-993-2323
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon May 28 2001 - 09:50:19 MDT